twhy and others, i have met or spoken with quite a few heads of adcomms... UVA, Georgetown, George Mason, Columbia, William and Mary etc. My understanding is that in fact, they DO like to see some sort of an addendum IF you have 2 scores that have a large discrepency. All except Will and Mary said that large typically means 7 points or more in which case they will, "a large majority of the time" consider only the higher score. however, they do like you to at least acknowledge the fact that here you have 2 scores with 15 points difference, what the hell?

twhy, that being said, its only my opinion and i would include a statement about it. however, ALWAYS remember less is more when you are doing your apps, basically you either have it on lsat and gpa or you dont. if you have it with a condition, WAIT for the second LSAT before proceeding to write an addendum JUST IN CASE. wait and see because no school you are applying to should have a deadline of before Jan 15th anyway. Then once you get your score, write VERY simply as the examply about how there were circumstances and here are the scores and you acknowledge the difference and you believe the latter is more indicative, period. nothing about your job or making an attempt to connect your score and job none of that, it does come across as arrogant and WAY too much. one paragraph, no whining, just hoping.

yes an addendum can be added. I wouldnt send the app first though, i'd just wait (unless you are hinting that you have already applied of course lol?). i'd wait and do it all at once but, if you already have sent it, then yes, add it later.

i understand the natural inclination to add something about the job because we all add our perspective and what we know to each situation in our lives, its confortable that way but be uncomfortable and leave the job out simply address the issue.

To be blunt, I got bored somewhere in the first paragraph, and didn't make it to the end of the second paragraph (but what I did read, I didn't like, not to put too fine a point on it). Mentally, I found myself rephrasing it along the lines of:

"While I have two fairly divergent test scores, I would ask that you consider the second of them as more fairly representative of my potential performance on the LSAT. Testing conditions for the first LSAT were less than optimal. The latter score more accurately represents my testing potential when the testing environment is not a distraction."

If you really want to know what rubs me the wrong way about the addendum as written:

- The first paragraph seems irrelevant [I mean, I see how it is relevant, but I at minimum find it extraneous for the genre and what I would think you are trying to do here, which is give them more information with a minimum of whining, not proffer them a grand theory about equity analyses]

- The second paragraph seems about twice as long as it needs to be. If you must start narrating about the testing conditions (which I would avoid), I would keep it to, "The proctors were an unfortunate and unexpected distraction." But even that I would leave out.

- I would cut the third paragraph, too. As doctorgonzo later notes, it's actually a remarkably pitch-perfect imitation of the "bad addendum" in Ms. Ivey's work.

That is all very pointed, which I recognize. Hopefully the honest response is worth the criticism; if not, I apologize.